Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Feb 26, 2016 23:38:33 GMT -8
In the end, people have the right to participate or not, given the value they see in the conversation. Since the discussion has gone from the BSC to anemometers/wind reporting I will add this off-topic post: Agreed - this is a public group, not a high-end club... We are no different than a Yahoo comments section, in the sense that anyone can register and chip in. We can't start pointing fingers back at the group, for something that now six people have chipped in on. It's strange that everyone is now interested in anemometers... However, it is nice to hear measured remarks, from members with more knowledge than myself in the field. There have been a number of pictures of vacuum cleaners posted on this forum. That makes interest in the navigational aspects of anemometers seem entirely logical, in comparison.
|
|
ehkolie
Oiler (New Member)
Posts: 7
|
Post by ehkolie on Feb 27, 2016 9:30:38 GMT -8
1500UTC. Barge thingy broken again. Quinitsa to the rescue.
|
|
|
Post by northwesterner on Feb 27, 2016 10:10:43 GMT -8
Here's the latest official word on the BSC project. - from Management's Discussion and Analysis report Read that last sentence a few times... Thanks for pointing this out Low Light Mike. I've watched this thread with great curiosity but made few comments over the last couple of months. The above quoted sentence from the the latest Management Discussion and Analysis report is very telling. There was a lot of discussion about the delay in BCF's acceptance of the BSC. One thing that was not said, but I was intrigued by, was the possibility that the BSC was actually built flawlessly, but to bad specifications. What? When BCF was refusing to accept the BSC, there is the possibility that its performance was subpar, but was not due to flaws in the construction of the ferry. If the entire engineered system (cables, ferry, motor, seafloor geography, etc) was done incorrectly, leading to, for instance, the extreme weight drag of the cables on the ferry, and difficulty getting up to speed, it becomes a blame game. While a capital purchase like the BSC does need to meet design specifications, if the other things outside of Seapsan's control (the rest of the engineered system, for instance) was done incorrectly, how much blame does Seaspan take? If I were sitting at Seaspan, I'd say none, and I'd take that to the bank. We built the vessel to design standards. If it can't do what its supposed to do because the cable system was not engineered correctly, not our problem. The way BCF meekly announced that the vessel meets all specifications and accepted it hinted that basically Seaspan showed them the vessel is built to all design specs, and its now your problem. The final closeout negotiations could just be the last formality as BCF looks for concessions on costs due to "issues" ... What continues to intrigue me as this saga continues is how BCF is able to manage this capital investment project. @sccommuter noted a few days ago that (and I'm paraphrasing here) the vessel has been accepted and in service ... life moves on, and so should we (or at least that's how I took it). I think that is the incorrect approach. All organizations, whether full gov't, quasi-gov't (BCF) or fully private chose to make capital investment decisions. The pro forma financial projects are based on the best known information at the time the investment is analyzed. Most organizations have rigorous guidelines on how they evaluate these capital investments. If this thing ends up being a total turd, then a reflective organization setup for future success will analyze how this decision was made and look at changing the guidelines to correct the mistakes made when accepting this project. Another tell of an organization's success is how well they recover from a capital project that doesn't meet financial projections (and operational issues are always tied into financials). Can BCF save this project? Can they still make the financial projections with four crew (probably not). Can they meet the service standard for the route set by decades of the Quinitsa (do no harm)? What if they can't? How will they adjust? These are all good questions, and I look forward to hearing "the rest of the story" over the next few years.
|
|
|
Post by northwesterner on Feb 27, 2016 11:19:37 GMT -8
The BSC could wind up the same way the PacifiCat class did - built to specs and accepted from the builder, but an operational failure. Thank you for referencing this experience in not too long ago past history. That's exactly what I was getting at.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2016 15:26:11 GMT -8
Since the discussion has gone from the BSC to anemometers/wind reporting... Wind speed is interesting as a sort of reformed Navy type, as wind has an effect on fire control solutions and helicopter operations. Anemometers can be "fooled" by their placement on a ship, as the wind "across the deck" can be deflected away from, or funneled toward the spinny bits. This results in a lower or higher wind speed at the anemometer, correspondingly higher or lower wind speed than the wind over the pointy end, top of the mast, or the blunt end. Our sleek greyhounds of the sea mostly have at least two fixed anemometers and a weather witch with a hand held. The single unit installation on the BSC appears to be in a decent position on the west end. One more comment. Thanks for posting this picture, it explains the problem. The display is a Furuno and usually connected to a Furuno cup wind monitor, so no calibration ( except minor corrections ) is necessary. The wind sensor installed on the BSC is a 4 blade Young. In this case the electronic display value needs to be calibrated for the propeller used with an anemometer drive with known rpm and a conversion factor for the propeller used and display units chosen. I am pretty sure that was not done or a wrong factor was used to adjust the display. The display shows about double the real wind.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Feb 29, 2016 23:10:03 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 3, 2016 12:06:08 GMT -8
An intersting BSC item relayed to me from a colleague, re this morning's commute:
Apparently there was mayday call by a boat somewhere near Deep Bay. This impacted the BSC because the coast guard boat (or some other responder) needed to cross the cable-ferry path in Baynes Sound, to reach the scene.
So the ferry was held in-dock at Denman West, waiting for that rescue boat to appear in Baynes Sound and for it to cross the cable path. After that, the ferry was allowed to proceed.
|
|
|
Post by titanium48 on Mar 4, 2016 11:18:59 GMT -8
Why is the cable crossing such a concern here? The interior cable ferries cross navigable waterways, but they do not have the red and green lights. At most there might be a caution sign warning boaters about the ferry cables. Stopping 100 m from the terminal seems particularly bizarre, as the cables would be close to the bottom in the center of the channel (unless the fishing boat was in front of the ferry, which would be a problem with a self-propelled ferry as well).
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 4, 2016 11:45:39 GMT -8
Why is the cable crossing such a concern here? The interior cable ferries cross navigable waterways, but they do not have the red and green lights. At most there might be a caution sign warning boaters about the ferry cables. Stopping 100 m from the terminal seems particularly bizarre, as the cables would be close to the bottom in the center of the channel (unless the fishing boat was in front of the ferry, which would be a problem with a self-propelled ferry as well). There are 44 pages in this thread (so far) that are there for reading & understanding why some people have their doubts about the long term viability of this cable ferry. Some might dismiss the doubters as 'protestors' or a 'rag-tag' bunch (Christie lingo for you), but in fact some of these people have some pretty impressive credentials and I for one am inclined to take their criticisms seriously. They also happen to live on one or the other island served by this vessel. For them this is a lifeline, not simply a minor vessel on an insignificant route.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 4, 2016 11:58:14 GMT -8
Stopping 100 m from the terminal seems particularly bizarre, as the cables would be close to the bottom in the center of the channel For this item, I think your premise about the cables being "close to the bottom" might be the issue here. I'm not an expert, but I think the cables are closer to the surface, all the way across, compared to a BC interior cable-ferry.
|
|
|
Post by kevins on Mar 4, 2016 15:10:10 GMT -8
The interior ferries and the BSC are completely different operations. There is virtually no vessel traffic on the interior cable ferry runs and any boats that do show up there are small pleasure boats, Regulations and manning for a cable ferry are the same no matter if it is in salt water or fresh water.
Why any difference between the cable ferries TC requirements? The TC Inspectors can require whatever they feel will make the operation safe. This may change according to numerous conditions, the big one is vessel traffic.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 5, 2016 21:23:33 GMT -8
With the opening of the herring fishery has come an increase in the level of discord between cable ferry critics and BC Ferries. There have been allegations of service delays, incursions of fishing boats into the barge's path, and even nets being caught up on the cables. On the other hand, BC Ferries seems to be increasingly irritated at the criticisms, saying that BC Ferries, DFO, and fishers are working well together, and saying that the rumors and 'falsehoods' do not warrant a response. Which has prompted, in turn, suggestions of either incompetence or dishonesty. "It's sad, really", a BC Ferries rep said, of the thrust of the critique.
I'm almost wondering if we're on the verge of a Republican style bearpit, with people questioning each other's umm, hand size.
I've no idea how the general travelling public feels about all of this. For the most part, they seem to be getting from one side of Baynes Sound to the other in a relatively timely fashion. No doubt there's a learning curve for mariners in general, with a cable ferry plunked down in the middle of a rich fishing territory, even if it's just for a few days. Just adds to the intriguing question of just how this cable venture will turn out, when all things are considered.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 5, 2016 21:39:35 GMT -8
I've no idea how the general travelling public feels about all of this. For the most part, they seem to be getting from one side of Baynes Sound to the other in a relatively timely fashion. No doubt there's a learning curve for mariners in general, with a cable ferry plunked down in the middle of a rich fishing territory, even if it's just for a few days. Just adds to the intriguing question of just how this cable venture will turn out, when all things are considered. My colleague, who takes the BSC twice a day, is happy with it. For the most part, it is a quicker trip. The high level of antagonistic emotion on the BSC issues seems to be a product of this being the "Facebook age" of commentators. A couple years ago, most antagonistic commentators on various issues needed to be registered users of newspapers. But now, with so many Facebook protest/watchdog/enthusiast groups, it is much easier for many people to join up and add to the noise. Facebook is such a part of peoples' daily lives, so it is now easier to mouth-off, and to do it while still ticked-off about something. And some people have staked personal and professional reputations on this experiment being wrong, and so any possible glitch is immediately highlighted and magnified. Yeah, a bit of a mob pile-on at times.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 5, 2016 22:09:28 GMT -8
I've no idea how the general travelling public feels about all of this. For the most part, they seem to be getting from one side of Baynes Sound to the other in a relatively timely fashion. No doubt there's a learning curve for mariners in general, with a cable ferry plunked down in the middle of a rich fishing territory, even if it's just for a few days. Just adds to the intriguing question of just how this cable venture will turn out, when all things are considered. My colleague, who takes the BSC twice a day, is happy with it. For the most part, it is a quicker trip. The high level of antagonistic emotion on the BSC issues seems to be a product of this being the "Facebook age" of commentators. A couple years ago, most antagonistic commentators on various issues needed to be registered users of newspapers. But now, with so many Facebook protest/watchdog/enthusiast groups, it is much easier for many people to join up and add to the noise. Facebook is such a part of peoples' daily lives, so it is now easier to mouth-off, and to do it while still ticked-off about something. And some people have staked personal and professional reputations on this experiment being wrong, and so any possible glitch is immediately highlighted and magnified. Yeah, a bit of a mob pile-on at times. ...but, in fairness, it also needs to be remembered that some of the opposition has come from people with sophisticated knowledge of maritime technology, and a personal background of professional experience. Far more than facebook ranting. The outcome of some of their concerns might not be known for some time.
I still oppose this project, for reasons that I don't think have been dispelled, but since I'm very much a layman on many of the issues, I'm able to take a somewhat dispassionate view and be interested in how things play out.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 5, 2016 22:18:02 GMT -8
...but, in fairness, it also needs to be remembered that some of the opposition has come from people with sophisticated knowledge of maritime technology, and a personal background of professional experience. Far more than facebook ranting. The outcome of some of their concerns might not be known for some time. That's right. I wasn't trying to group the expert-objectors with the facebook ranters. But even the expert-objectors sometimes presented with a bit too much drama; but not always. I don't agree with the project, but I'm not invested other than as a taxpayer. I am able to step back and smile and laugh at the project, as well as to criticize it. And "a new ship is a new ship" (even when it's not a ship). So I'm always interested in a new ship, no matter the issues. Stepping back, this is a fascinating scenario to observe playing-out.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 5, 2016 22:58:50 GMT -8
In some ways this whole cable ferry venture reminds me of BCFS's decision driven by desperation to purchase the Northern Adventure (10 years ago, almost). The company did their level best to put a positive spin (remember all those creature comforts) on the introduction of their new ship. In hind site, things have worked out 'sort of', but I think that if they had to do this all over again they might have chosen an alternate path.
We will know in a few years how things pan out with this cable experiment.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 5, 2016 23:39:49 GMT -8
In some ways this whole cable ferry venture reminds me of BCFS's decision driven by desperation to purchase the Northern Adventure (10 years ago, almost). The company did their level best to put a positive spin (remember all those creature comforts) on the introduction of their new ship. In hind site, things have worked out 'sort of', but I think that if they had to do this all over again they might have chosen an alternate path. We will know in a few years how things pan out with this cable experiment. Several years down the road, I'm still inclined to cut BC Ferries a lot of slack with the NorAd. They were really over a barrel, after a terrible misfortune, and they made a purchase they might not have made given more time. It's understandable that their spinmeisters worked hard to make the boat as palatable as possible. The cable project, on the other hand, wasn't forced; it was a product partly of the ludicrous ASP mindset, and of Martin Crilly saying, hey guys, try a cable ferry to Denman. Overall, it was a matter of the Liberal government pretending to be as bottom line efficient as possible, and replacing a perfectly serviceable operation with an unnecessary, experimental one. Maybe it will work... but BC Ferries is unquestionably fudging the numbers already, toting up operating savings without deducting the capital costs. As Pete says, the main concerns are yet to play out. Still, a part of me looks at it from the BC Ferries standpoint, and suspects that critics are perhaps throwing the maximum amount of s--t at the wall, and seeing what sticks. Hard to tell, at this point in time.
Mr Horn, Jordan Bateman is a 'taxpayer'. I've never gotten the impression that that's the extent of your concerns.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Mar 5, 2016 23:42:43 GMT -8
yes, fifty years ago we built a modest roll-roll off drive thru northern ferry my old QPR, the last major vessel built at Victoria's VMD, and we built many other home built ferries but now our jobs, jobs, Jobs, would more likely be wall-mart greeter style as all advanced vessels are now built overseas, and we can manage a cable ferry! mr.dot.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 5, 2016 23:50:03 GMT -8
Mr Horn, Jordan Bateman is a 'taxpayer'. I've never gotten the impression that that's the extent of your concerns. I had to Google "Jordan Bateman," and then I shuddered. That's not me. Besides being a taxpayer, I care about strong coastal communities, because that's my idea of home. I grew up the idea that Gabriola was a working community, same with Hornby, same with Quadra, etc. That's my idea of what Coastal BC is; people living and working in all sorts of places on the coast. ....and that's just me thinking out loud, to myself. Thanks for making me think....late on a Saturday night.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2016 9:38:59 GMT -8
In some ways this whole cable ferry venture reminds me of BCFS's decision driven by desperation to purchase the Northern Adventure (10 years ago, almost). The company did their level best to put a positive spin (remember all those creature comforts) on the introduction of their new ship. In hind site, things have worked out 'sort of', but I think that if they had to do this all over again they might have chosen an alternate path. We will know in a few years how things pan out with this cable experiment. Several years down the road, I'm still inclined to cut BC Ferries a lot of slack with the NorAd. They were really over a barrel, after a terrible misfortune, and they made a purchase they might not have made given more time. It's understandable that their spinmeisters worked hard to make the boat as palatable as possible. The cable project, on the other hand, wasn't forced; it was a product partly of the ludicrous ASP mindset, and of Martin Crilly saying, hey guys, try a cable ferry to Denman. Overall, it was a matter of the Liberal government pretending to be as bottom line efficient as possible, and replacing a perfectly serviceable operation with an unnecessary, experimental one. Maybe it will work... but BC Ferries is unquestionably fudging the numbers already, toting up operating savings without deducting the capital costs. As Pete says, the main concerns are yet to play out. Still, a part of me looks at it from the BC Ferries standpoint, and suspects that critics are perhaps throwing the maximum amount of s--t at the wall, and seeing what sticks. Hard to tell, at this point in time.
Mr Horn, Jordan Bateman is a 'taxpayer'. I've never gotten the impression that that's the extent of your concerns.
It was not Crilly saying let's try a cable ferry to Denman. He did initiate the process though. He sponsored a seminar in June 2005 about ASP opportunities www.bcferrycommission.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/asp/s69SeminarProceedings.pdf, attended by interested folks and BCF management. Please note, the first name on the participant list, Ivan Askgaard. On March 15th, 2006 Crilly issued Memorandum 15, expressing support for creative, unsolicited proposals. Sometimes after that Mr. Askgaard and partners presented a proposal for Route 7, Earls Cove to Saltery Bay, involving a bridge to Nelson Island and a cable ferry across Jervis Inlet. BCF was not interested. THEN Crilly suggested to look at Routes 21 and 22, and BCF signed an exclusive agreement with Askgaard to investigate a cable ferry pilot project for those routes. In early 2008 the agreement was terminated. At a public information meeting in September 2011 presented by Mark Collins, VP of Engineering at that time, www.bcferries.com/files/AboutBCF/publicconsultation/presentations_and_reports/cable_ferry_-_public_information_session_sept_23_2011.pdf, BCF confirms that an "Unsolicited external proposal prompts Ferry Commissioner to press BCFS to study cable ferry".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2016 15:54:14 GMT -8
It would certainly be interesting to look at the ASP aspect as well as the P3 approach with regard to ferry ownership and service, what works and what not, but this is obviously not the right thread.
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Mar 7, 2016 11:39:03 GMT -8
I was there when the BSC sounded it's horn, the lights were switched to red, and it headed out from Buckley Bay toward Denman. I watched the BSC stop, and the lights go back to green when seiners drifting downwind from the Deep Bay area toward Comox came close to, and then crossed the cable path. Not once, but twice. That is an incursion, and no matter how you spin it, vessels from the herring crossed the path of the cables while the BSC was mid channel. Why it happened is a matter of conjecture and speculation. Instead of explaining what happened, BC Ferries denied it and took a pot shot at my credibility and ethics, and that of CHEK TV. That's life in the PR world, and to be frank, that's been the way everything has been handled in the saga of the cable ferry, on both sides of the fence. I think this would have played out differently if they has taken the approach of constructive comment v silence. Yup, the drive system is not working as expected so we're replacing the bulls wheels, yup, the ramp angles are too steep so we're adding some additional flotation et c. Anyhow - I write about the successes and issues with the BSC, and try to keep opinion out of it. If, or are, BCF are reporting "incursions" by fishing vessels across their navigation paths? If the Coast Guard is aware of these events occurring why aren't the CG folks out in the area doing patrols and enforcing the 'give way' rules of the road?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2016 17:47:14 GMT -8
The BSC stopped shortly after leaving the dock at 10:40am on Friday. Then the lights turned green. Reports say the Neocaligus ordered the BSC over radio to stop because the seiner Western Investor was in the cable corridor. BCF calls that rumours and falsehoods. Coast Guard has been alerted to the conflicting reports and looks into that. We might learn the truth.
Is this important? Not really for the herring fishery. If BCF was not telling the truth, yes it is important to island residents.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 7, 2016 20:48:37 GMT -8
No fishing boats today, and the barge sailing back and forth with happy monotony.
Somehow I doubt that a couple of days of occasional confusion between an existing fishery and a brand new cable ferry operation will have any long term bearing on the success or failure of this venture, BC Ferries' factual fudging notwithstanding. The essential aspects to the story will be played out in other areas.
|
|
ehkolie
Oiler (New Member)
Posts: 7
|
Post by ehkolie on Mar 10, 2016 7:08:00 GMT -8
BS Con chicken out today? Quinitsa to the rescue.........again. Hmmmmmm.............Thought BC Ferries said it was 'storm proven' to 45+ knots.
|
|